Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: ITT we list cases that we think were wrongly decided  (Read 3468 times)

The Thread Starter

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 390
    • View Profile
ITT we list cases that we think were wrongly decided
« on: May 06, 2007, 11:11:45 PM »
State v. Norman, 324 N.C. 253

39-year-old defendant badly abused by husband during 25-year marriage; frequently punched, kicked, hit with bear bottles and other objects, burned with cigarettes and hot coffee, forced into prostituteion at local truck stop, humiliated in public and called "dog", "female dog", "whore", forced to eat pet food from bowl on floor, threatened with maiming and killing for years.  Defendant tried to contact social services, but was dragged back by husband, beaten and burned.  Defendant eventually got a pistol and shot her husband while he was sleeping.

Trial court convicted defendant for voluntary manslaughter.  Appeals court rejected self-defense argument, affirmed conviction.

bruin

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 13867
    • View Profile
    • lsn profile
Re: ITT we list cases that we think were wrongly decided
« Reply #1 on: May 06, 2007, 11:16:11 PM »
Hunt Foods v. Doliner, 26 A.D.2d 41

Check the SFLAD thread for some explanation. The court here did get bitchslapped by Snyder v. Herbert Greenbaum & Assocs., 38 Md. App. 144, 380.
Attending UVa
Click below for more info
http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/display.php?cycle=0405&user=bruin04
Come on, I know you want to click me.

bruin

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 13867
    • View Profile
    • lsn profile
Re: ITT we list cases that we think were wrongly decided
« Reply #2 on: May 06, 2007, 11:23:05 PM »
Hunt Foods v. Doliner, 26 A.D.2d 41

Check the SFLAD thread for some explanation. The court here did get bitchslapped by Snyder v. Herbert Greenbaum & Assocs., 38 Md. App. 144, 380.

hm...that thread's almost 1800 pages long...cliffsnotes?

It's on one of the two most current pages. Basically: "Was about Hunt buying some stock (controlling share) of a company that Doliner owned; whether a purchase option was conditional.

There clearly was not (Doliner even testified that Hunt would back out of the deal if the condition was included). But, the Judge did not like the outcome, so allowed Doliner (on appeal) to present parol evidence that there was a condition precedent to the option"
Attending UVa
Click below for more info
http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/display.php?cycle=0405&user=bruin04
Come on, I know you want to click me.

Lampshade Punk

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1010
  • "Even in the quietest moments."
    • View Profile
Re: ITT we list cases that we think were wrongly decided
« Reply #3 on: May 06, 2007, 11:37:11 PM »
Kelo v. City of New London.  July, 2005. 

Miss P

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 21337
    • View Profile
Re: ITT we list cases that we think were wrongly decided
« Reply #4 on: May 06, 2007, 11:38:49 PM »
Kelo v. City of New London.  July, 2005. 

I think public use is pretty much a dead letter.
That's cool how you referenced a case.

Quote from: archival
I'm so far from the end of my tether right now that I reckon I could knit myself some socks with the slack.

Lampshade Punk

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1010
  • "Even in the quietest moments."
    • View Profile
Re: ITT we list cases that we think were wrongly decided
« Reply #5 on: May 06, 2007, 11:41:08 PM »
Kelo v. City of New London.  July, 2005. 

I think public use is pretty much a dead letter.

can you say this differently.  its been a LONG weekend.  thank you.

Miss P

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 21337
    • View Profile
Re: ITT we list cases that we think were wrongly decided
« Reply #6 on: May 06, 2007, 11:53:57 PM »
Kelo v. City of New London.  July, 2005. 

I think public use is pretty much a dead letter.

can you say this differently.  its been a LONG weekend.  thank you.

Well, okay, briefly, because I have an exam in about nine hours.  Basically, if you disagree with Kelo, you're disagreeing with one of three things:

1. The notion of eminent domain power in general (that is, you value the sanctity of private property over government uses);
2. Using the power of eminent domain to transfer property from one private landholder to another; or
3. Using the power of eminent domain for projects that are not reasonably understood as "public uses."

Me, I disagree with Kelo because it basically trashes the public use requirement of the Takings Clause by shifting it to public purpose, and then again allowing a vague promise of economic benefits to stand in for a legitimate public purpose (Thomas wrote a decent dissent on this point).  My point, I guess, was that by taking this case up, the libertarian hacks at the Institute for Justice really screwed us over.  They should have known this court wouldn't do well on the public use question, and they made bad law.  At this point, I think it will be nearly impossible to challenge any proposed taking based upon the public use (as opposed to the just compensation) requirement.
That's cool how you referenced a case.

Quote from: archival
I'm so far from the end of my tether right now that I reckon I could knit myself some socks with the slack.

jimfoolery

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1544
  • Bo knows.
    • View Profile
Re: ITT we list cases that we think were wrongly decided
« Reply #7 on: May 07, 2007, 12:18:37 AM »
My own suit against the makers of The Neverending Story.
Werewolf bar mitzvah, spooky, scary,
Boys becoming men, men becoming wolves!

Judge Smails

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 127
  • Nulli Secundus
    • View Profile
Re: ITT we list cases that we think were wrongly decided
« Reply #8 on: May 07, 2007, 12:29:12 AM »
Anything that involves Penumbras.


Liberal nutjobs legislation from bench = unprestijuzz

John Blackthorne

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2112
    • View Profile
Re: ITT we list cases that we think were wrongly decided
« Reply #9 on: May 07, 2007, 12:38:52 AM »

Marbury v. Madison
"I only eat inorganic foods. If it doesn't contain molybdenum or something from the noble gases, I'm just not interested"-- Lyle McDonald